Dominick recently wrote:
Wrapping up the answers to several posts:
On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 09:26:45AM +0100, Uwe Pross wrote:
Good morning Fvwm Workers,
How about making a statement on the fvwm web site instead
of a new license?
Strictly speaking, it is no more than a statement,
I really don't like to answer this message, because I don't see a point.
We speak now which ethics is better, but this is irrelevant, the
developers (at least the ones who answered) expressed a wish not to mix
ethics with software.
Anyway, it seems Dominik wants to talk about ethics, so I will
On Sun, Mar 30, 2003 at 04:30:25PM +, Mikhael Goikhman wrote:
I really don't like to answer this message, because I don't see a point.
We speak now which ethics is better, but this is irrelevant, the
developers (at least the ones who answered) expressed a wish not to mix
ethics with
On Sun, Mar 30, 2003 at 10:20:24AM -0500, larry gensch wrote:
Dominick recently wrote:
Wrapping up the answers to several posts:
On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 09:26:45AM +0100, Uwe Pross wrote:
Good morning Fvwm Workers,
How about making a statement on the fvwm web site instead
of
Well, it got too much into politics to continue it.
The Dominik's reply makes some incorrect assumtions like I am from US and
do not know facts. I am from one of the several countries that commanded
all citizens to carry gaz masks with themselves (because Iraq may still
respond although most of
Hi Dominik...
There has been a lot of discussion about whether the ideas expressed in
the ethical license are really ethical or not (is it ethical to kill a
person? Is it ethical to not kill a person who is directly threatening
yourself or your children? Etc.)
This kind of thing is,
